Venkatesh v. State, Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 26.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Venkatesh ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Rep. By, The Inspector of Police, Arambakkam Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

Crime No.121 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.121 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police. For petitioner :

Mr.P.Chandrasekar For Respondent :

Mr.A.Gopinath Government Advocate (Criminal Side) 1/4

O R D E R

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 02.08.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 103, and 62(2) of BNS, in Crime No.121 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that de facto complainant's brother who is the deceased in this case, married a woman, who is not belongs to their community. Due to which, there was enmity between the accused and the de facto complainant's family. On 31.07.2025, while deceased was in the lake, all the accused (A1 to A9) went there with deadly weapons in 3 twowheelers, attacked the deceased indiscriminately and caused severe injuries and subsequently deceased died after making statement in this regard. Hence, the complaint.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 02.08.2025. Hence, he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.

2/4

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police opposed the grant of bail, reiterating the prosecution case. He further submitted that there are totally 11 accused in this case. The petitioner, along with other accused, went in a group and attacked the deceased indiscriminately. It is specifically alleged that A4 and A6 assaulted the deceased with aruval along with other accused. It is further submitted that the investigation has not yet been completed.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that the petitioners are having specific overt act attacking deceased with aruval, and this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed. 26.09.2025 cda 3/4

K.RAJASEKAR, J.

cda To 1.The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Gumudipoondi.

2.The Inspector of Police, Arambakkam Police Station, Thiruvallur District.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

26.09.2025 4/4